- Loading ...
- Loading ...
- Loading ...
- Loading ...
- 143,301 since May 2016
- Total Stats
- 630 Posts
- 772 Tags
- 4,153 Comments
- 1,250 Comment Posters
- 85 Post Categories
- 50 Most Commented Posts
- AutoCAD 2013 – An Autodesk Help writer responds - 164 comments
- AutoCAD 2012 – Putting things back to “normal” - 161 comments
- AutoCAD 2011 – Putting things back to “normal” - 136 comments
- AutoCAD 2009 – Putting things back to “normal” - 121 comments
- AutoCAD 2010 – Putting things back to “normal” - 106 comments
- AutoCAD 2018 – why did the DWG format change? - 97 comments
- AutoCAD 2009 – Why do you hate the Ribbon? - 81 comments
- Why AutoCAD for Mac is a bad idea - 76 comments
- Let’s critique AutoCAD’s parametric constraints - 63 comments
- The Hitchhiker’s Guide to AutoCAD explained - 47 comments
- How will you react to Autodesk’s new upgrade pricing? - 41 comments
- Restoring Hatch double-click in AutoCAD 2011 - 41 comments
- Is AutoCAD stability getting better or worse? - 41 comments
- AutoCAD 2012 – Missing a few things? - 38 comments
- AutoCAD WS Contest - 36 comments
- (Don’t) Ask Autodesk a question - 32 comments
- Any Bricscad users out there? - 32 comments
- Olympic Fencing – Mythbusting the Shin v Heidemann Controversy - 31 comments
- Autodesk perpetual license owners to get screwed big-time - 31 comments
- Why Autodesk’s Cloud push will fail, part 1 – failure defined - 30 comments
- AutoCAD for Linux – another bad idea - 27 comments
- AutoCAD 2012 – ClassicArray Beta - 27 comments
- Why don’t you trust Autodesk? - 27 comments
- AutoCAD 2013 – Autodesk pulls off a miracle with Help - 27 comments
- What are the best and worst features ever added to AutoCAD? - 26 comments
- Older AutoCAD loses (part of) the plot - 25 comments
- Trebling upgrade prices was not enough for Autodesk - 25 comments
- Autodesk license costs options – summary 2 - 25 comments
- AutoCAD 2009 – How do you use the Ribbon? - 24 comments
- Ribbon acceptance in AutoCAD and Revit - 24 comments
- What is loaded at AutoCAD startup, and when? - 23 comments
- AutoCAD 2013 – What’s new? - 23 comments
- AutoCAD 2009 – Do you use the menu bar? - 22 comments
- AutoCAD 2009 & 2010 users – out of memory errors? - 22 comments
- AutoCAD 2012 – Downloading the trial is a trial - 22 comments
- AutoCAD 2013 Service Pack 1 – Now you see it, now you don’t - 22 comments
- AutoCAD 2018 – 2/10, would not rent - 22 comments
- Dissecting Dieter’s perpetual points - 22 comments
- Vernor v Autodesk – why I think Autodesk is right - 21 comments
- Cloud concerns – terms and conditions - 21 comments
- AutoCAD 2013 for Mac – the holes live on - 20 comments
- Is there anybody out there? - 20 comments
- AutoCAD 2018 – bear this in mind - 20 comments
- Advertising, ethics and editorial freedom - 19 comments
- Bug watch – identify this insect - 19 comments
- Downloading AutoCAD 2011 - 19 comments
- Autodesk for Mac – the hole story - 19 comments
- AutoCAD 2012 – Array has good and bad points - 19 comments
- AutoCAD 2013 – Download the trial without Akamai - 19 comments
- Autodesk license costs options – summary - 19 comments
- Total Stats
- May 2017 (23)
- April 2017 (17)
- March 2017 (25)
- February 2017 (3)
- January 2017 (21)
- December 2016 (8)
- November 2016 (6)
- October 2016 (13)
- September 2016 (3)
- August 2016 (5)
- July 2016 (3)
- June 2016 (6)
- May 2016 (4)
- April 2016 (2)
- January 2013 (1)
- December 2012 (1)
- November 2012 (8)
- October 2012 (4)
- September 2012 (5)
- August 2012 (2)
- July 2012 (2)
- June 2012 (2)
- May 2012 (5)
- April 2012 (7)
- March 2012 (3)
- February 2012 (4)
- January 2012 (1)
- December 2011 (3)
- November 2011 (16)
- October 2011 (15)
- September 2011 (5)
- August 2011 (1)
- June 2011 (2)
- May 2011 (4)
- April 2011 (9)
- March 2011 (9)
- October 2010 (5)
- September 2010 (13)
- August 2010 (9)
- July 2010 (10)
- June 2010 (7)
- May 2010 (23)
- April 2010 (16)
- March 2010 (20)
- February 2010 (11)
- January 2010 (5)
- October 2009 (3)
- September 2009 (2)
- August 2009 (4)
- July 2009 (2)
- June 2009 (12)
- May 2009 (11)
- April 2009 (12)
- March 2009 (6)
- February 2009 (22)
- January 2009 (6)
- December 2008 (8)
- November 2008 (13)
- October 2008 (22)
- September 2008 (18)
- August 2008 (3)
- July 2008 (13)
- June 2008 (12)
- May 2008 (11)
- April 2008 (23)
- March 2008 (38)
- February 2008 (22)
One of the blogs I read regularly is Photoshop Disasters, which recently posted a picture of a Ralph Lauren ad. In common with many fashion photos, this showed a skinny model that appeared to have been further skinnified on somebody’s computer to the point that the poor waif was ridiculously deformed. Like this:
Nothing out of the ordinary there, then. Under normal circumstances it would have received a few dozen comments and scrolled off the front page in a week or so, because there is no shortage of bad image manipulation out there for the blog to snigger at. The image was reposted at Boing Boing, but it would still have been forgotten in a week.
Except this time, Ralph Lauren prodded its lawyers into action and demanded the image be removed from both sites, issuing a Full post
This sign was visible for some months at my daughters’ old school:
It vanished rather quickly after I was spotted taking a photo of it. My daughters don’t go to that school any more. Instead, they go to the school where I took this photo this morning:
Again, the sign vanished almost instantly.
OK, so the last one was too easy. Is this one any harder? Who is this?
Bonus brownie points are available for identifying the time and place.
The first person to identify the pixellated personage below will win a virtual doughnut. Bonus sprinkles will be provided if anyone can identify the other people, the event, the location and the year.
Picture courtesy of Donnia Tabor-Hanson (CADMama), from this thread in the AUGI Coffee Without CAD forum. I encourage you to read that thread and see if you can contribute to the idea it is promoting, but not until you’ve had a guess here! Readers of that thread and the people appearing in the photo should recuse themselves. Over to you!
Edit: lots of right answers (which I’ve now unhidden). Well done, Owen!
No, not the Bug Watch, just a bug you can watch. Does anybody know what this insect is? It is the second one of these we’ve found in our home in Western Australia. It’s very active and it smells horrible.
For those of you who can’t access YouTube, here are some photos of the bug:
A higher resolution version of the above picture is available here. This is the bug about to be given its freedom:
On release, it buried itself in our lawn:
In 25 years in Australia, I had never seen one of these until recently. Any ideas?
Pathetic perspective, courtesy of the work experience person doing Clark Rubber‘s brochure images:
The same background is used for another table set. The perspective doesn’t match in that one either, but it’s not as bad as this. Maybe it’s just CAD geeks who notice this sort of thing?
One more to come from this brochure, and it’s the worst one of the lot!
More Fotoshop phun courtesy of Clark Rubber:
We’ll allow the oversized box and balls as an artistic device. But the woman has been cut out (badly) and pasted in with little regard to scale; that water is about 30″ deep. She either has very stumpy legs compared with her skinny top half, or the Autodesk shark is in there and it has given her an amputation at about the calf level. Why is her forearm oddly shaped, and shorter and thinner than that of the girl? And what’s going on down by the ladder?
Why is it darker one side of the rail than the other? Why is the edge of the water higher and darker on that side? Why does the ladder cast no shadow? Inquiring minds want to know.
Here’s the first of a few posts that combine the two. I recently received a Clark Rubber brochure, and from the look of it (and the web site), Clark Rubber is not receiving the same kind of service from its Photoshop people that it provides to its own customers. I could fill this whole blog with disasters from that one brochure, but here are just a couple for a start.
Putting aside the awful water spray, the cut-and-paste problems, the strange lighting/shadow issues, the unrealistic water edge and the rest of it, how did that picture of the kid in the pool also manage to appear on the water cannon itself (sans pool and …
Here’s another video I have done to the music of Swedish metal band Opeth (the first one is here). This band’s latest album, Watershed, does not come with conventional lyrics in the booklet, but rather a page full of rune-type characters. There are actually two different pages in different editions of the album, and in order to work out the lyrics you need to rotate the pages, work out a substitution cipher and combine the two sources.
To save you the trouble of doing all that, here are the lyrics of Heir Apparent. This is the only song on the album that contains only angry Cookie Monster vocals (beware!), so without my expert deciphering efforts (ahem!) it would be rather difficult for the uninitiated to know what the song was all about. If you can put up with the vocals, I think you’ll enjoy this!
When AutoCAD 2009 arrives, what exactly do you get? Inside the brown cardboard box is a fatter DVD case containing one DVD and a set of cards describing the new features:
I haven’t discovered the rules yet; maybe they are in Help somewhere. Is Menu Browser worth more than ViewCube? Does Action Recorder trump Quick Properties? Is DWFx a wildcard? Inquiring minds want to know.
I was intrigued to see Autodesk personality and fellow blogger Shaan Hurley posting a photo with his long-standing facial fuzz removed. Shaan may be moving in the opposite direction to myself (I’m getting hairier with age), but personally I don’t think he has gone far enough. I would like to see Shaan sporting a chrome dome. What do you think?
Original image © 2008 Shaan Hurley.
Offered without comment:
Similarly, thanks to Lynn Allen for linking to my post about her famous Cell Phone Story. Here she is, also at AU 2006, presenting me with a signed copy of her excellent book AutoCAD: Professional Tips and Techniques which I won by skillfully (ahem) waving my arms furiously at the right moment during her presentation.
Offered without comment:
As far as I can tell, it’s genuine. See here: http://www.astrologicalmagazine.com/